 Fixed TN - what's the big deal?, Trying to understand certain objections |
  |
 Jun 28 2005, 04:47 PM
Post
#26
|
|
|
Moving Target  Group: Members Posts: 675 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Seattle Member No.: 2,034  |
One thing that might help to patch the "fewer dice than required sucesses" problem is that it is a skill + attribute system, which can mean more dice in general being rolled (for non-combat tests anyway). If you really have an attribute of 1 and a skill of 1 applied to some test it might be reasonable that you are so bad at it that you would never succede at a more difficult test (ie the difference between your odds of success and zero is small enough that a game system can overlook it).
Some kind of exploding dice would have been nice, however. |
 |
 
|
|
Jun 28 2005, 06:30 PM
Post
#27
|
|||||||
|
Grand Master of Run-Fu Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,840 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Tir Tairngire Member No.: 178 |
Because then I need to have pregenned Regular attack, Full Attacks, full attacks with Rapid Shot, full attacks within 30 feet, full attacks when fighting defensively, full attacks with daggers, full attacks with other weapons, full attacks with daggers with rapid shot, full attacks with daggers and rapid shot within thirty feet, full attacks with the various magical weapons, etc, etc. By the time I get done pregenning every possible occurance, I'll have so many numbers on my sheet that I'll spend as much time looking them up as I would calculating them. And that's just the ranged attacks.
That's the way I like it, personally. It's really useful for perception tests, especially against multiple stealthing opponents. You'll get a lot of successes against Joe Clumsy, but not so many against super-stealthy cyber-ninja.
Generally, I'm the GM. I tend to keep track of it all in my head, abstracting as necessary. There aren't many devices that a player can have that alters his TN, and I have to keep track of his wound levels. (I also tend to disallow the Aptitude/Incompetence edges/flaws.) I also have to adjudicate lighting conditions for the NPCs anyway. Since I have to keep track of all that for the NPCs, I think of it as a community service to do it for the PCs as well. |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Jun 28 2005, 06:50 PM
Post
#28
|
|||||
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,718 Joined: 14-September 02 Member No.: 3,263 |
Think of it as your spell list. But you don't need to do nearly as many as you are suggesting. Weapons i have Focus or Finesse in, that are different than standard weapon, i do. Regular attack and Full attack are the same thing, so need for an extra line there. Rapid Shot, Many Shot, etc. i have seperate lines for. But just a note about Point Blank being applicable (so yes, under 30' you have to +1). |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Jun 29 2005, 03:20 AM
Post
#29
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 778 Joined: 6-April 05 Member No.: 7,298 |
See, I don't view this as a situation where the appropriate response is, "you suck, you shouldn't be playing that character". I view these things as interesting roleplaying challenges. Or, I view these things as NPCs doing the best they can manage in an unexpectedly difficult situation. I'm not entirely satisfied with the way SR3 handles this, but from all appearances, SR4 will handle it quite a bit worse. In D&D, it doesn't matter too much if you seem to always be running into bands of ogres where you once ran into bands of kobolds. It's kind of a fantasy game anyway, and people probably don't bother thinking about how the kobolds and ogres breed, whether the birth rate can compensate for the number killed by adventurers, why selective breeding doesn't generate less violent kobolds and ogres, and so on. However, in SR, if the runners are wandering around interacting with normal people, they're often going to be around people with low stats and skills. If something unexpected happens--they're wandering through a homeless camp in the barrens at night and a pack of ghouls attack, or something--I want the rules to support the scene, not fall all over the floor in an ugly mess.
Your calculations look like they're probably correct, but they're not what I'm getting at.
Even in SR3, many tests are opposed, and it is with opposed tests that flaws most readily become ridiculous (e.g. the sharpshooter who turns off the floodlights so that the criminals only roll 1 die due to darkness penalties, while the sharpshooter is still left with 6). I'm considering the percentage change in the expected number of successes with a given number of dice and a given starting TN. I'm not choosing this metric to be difficult, or because it supports my point of view, but because this is the place I most commonly run into problems in other systems. The nice aspect of SR3 is that, to a first approximation, changing conditions for everyone affects everyone equally. If your opponent outclassed you ten-to-one before the lights went out, he still outclasses you by ten-to-one. This means that you don't turn out the lights simply to gain a statistical advantage--you turn them out if you can see in the dark, or if not being hit is more important to you than hitting them, or they won't be able to see their target but your target will still be illuminated, etc.. For what it's worth, for difficult tasks, those needing a single test also scale probabilties by a factor of 25% each TN point (e.g. it'll go from a 4% chance to a 3% chance, a decrease of 25% of 4%, when the TN goes up by one). So you have the same type of scaling there, too. (On average, as the starting TN varies--as I said before, as it stands it ranges from 0% to 50%.) |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Jun 29 2005, 03:54 AM
Post
#30
|
|||||
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,718 Joined: 14-September 02 Member No.: 3,263 |
So what do you think is the source of it being a "roleplaying challenge"? I didn't say you suck, i said trying to do something that it hard should end up being, you know, HARD. Don't like that your character gets kicked in the nackers everytime the going gets tough? Then stop doing it by either bumping up the attributes from what you'd think they'd be and handle the characterisation by simulating through you own play, or just stopping trying to play a hard to play character. Otherwise just keep trying to have your weak character stay in conditions where the positives outweigh the negatives and they have the tactical advantage they need....which is kinda wack in regards to your PC being weak unless your character has some superior cunning aspect. I guess you could be trying to do a Pink Panther type. *shrug* In any event think of it as a....challenge. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Jun 29 2005, 04:10 AM
Post
#31
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 778 Joined: 6-April 05 Member No.: 7,298 |
As a player, I don't normally get to bump up my character's stats when I think I ought to have a chance, but I've gotten into an unexpected situation.
I'll try to run that by my next GM. Care to guess what the response will be? Anyway, my point is that SR4 makes it unreasonably difficult on these characters (or, possibly, unreasonably easy if they always have a die to roll and thus always have a 1/3 chance of getting a single hit). I'm not saying it shouldn't be hard--I'm saying that I want that end of the scale represented sensibly, and SR4 will apparently make it insensibly hard. (The way in which it will be insensible depends on how they handle having fewer than one die to roll, if they go for reducing the number of dice.) |
|
|
|
|
Jun 29 2005, 04:56 AM
Post
#32
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 437 Joined: 11-April 05 Member No.: 7,318 |
This table shows the change in %, that the number of average successes get at a given amount of dice.
That is, if I have 6 dice, I have an average of 4 successes, TN5, and if you give me one extra die, my number of successes becomes 17% better. Most runners will be using 10-15 dice pr. roll, covering attribute 5/skill 5, to attribute 6/skill 8. Adding or removing a single die in this area will modify the number of successes by ~10%, which, to me, seems like a fairly good increment. Better than moving TN from 5 to 6 or the ridiculous 6 to 7 TN move.
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 29 2005, 05:05 AM
Post
#33
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 778 Joined: 6-April 05 Member No.: 7,298 |
Yes, that's nice. I've been complaining the whole time about the system because once you have someone other than a typical runner using their favored skills, the system doesn't work so well. If you are content to only play typical runners against somewhat equivalent opposition, then you won't encounter the problem. But if you do that, almost any system can work well.
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 29 2005, 05:56 AM
Post
#34
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 316 Joined: 18-April 05 From: France Member No.: 7,343 |
How do you get average 0.67 hit by die (edit) with TN5 ? here is my calculation for d6 TN5 and the 6s exploding (result = average 0.4 hit/die) http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?act=...ndpost&p=276080 How do you make an 'average' runner with 6/6 in skill/attribut, if the rules make them more expensive to buy them above 3 ? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jun 29 2005, 06:06 AM
Post
#35
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 437 Joined: 11-April 05 Member No.: 7,318 |
I bet you have never seen a runner with less than 6 dice in his chosen speciality. Under the new system, the number of dice is 12 for a new character.
Average being 6 dice. |
|
|
|
|
Jun 29 2005, 06:19 AM
Post
#36
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 316 Joined: 18-April 05 From: France Member No.: 7,343 |
Yes I have seen some runner with 5 as max skill in sr3. It can be interesting for a character with wide skill area.
In sr4 a lot of beginner will probably begin with 4-5 max in their attribut, for the skill I am not sure. But the 0.67 ? |
|
|
|
|
Jun 29 2005, 06:35 AM
Post
#37
|
|||
|
Freelance Elf Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 7,324 Joined: 30-September 04 From: Texas Member No.: 6,714 |
This is just plain incorrect. Someone better at it than me can show you how your math is flawed -- I'm not sure how you did it, but you're wrong. Every die, individually, has a 1/3 chance of succeeded. I don't know how you're getting an average of 4 successes out of 6 dice. You should be looking forward to (on average) 2 successes with just your 6 dice. It'd take (about) 12 to get 4 successes (again, on average). Generally, and very very simply, speaking, it takes 3 dice to get 1 successes at TN 5. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jun 29 2005, 08:59 AM
Post
#38
|
|||
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,718 Joined: 14-September 02 Member No.: 3,263 |
That was due to a couple of things. First from the POV of otimizing BP or Skill point use at Chargen you took a 6 because 5 to 6 was one point, but after Chargen going from 5 to 6 was much more expensive than at any one increase from 0 through 5. The same was true with Attributes. The FAQ is suggesting that above average Attributes (a 3) are going to be rare, inferring it will be costly to raise above 3 (before racial mods). So basing such assumptions on the SR3 Chargen is rather dubious. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jun 29 2005, 09:17 AM
Post
#39
|
|||||
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,718 Joined: 14-September 02 Member No.: 3,263 |
Well you had been bitching that you couldn't play kids very well (in SR3 and expecting not in SR4). I thought this was more whining in that vein. :P But still i really don't see much of an issue if that isn't what you are worried about. You are using a weak skill in a hard situation. If you could expect success and an easy time under those conditions why bother have a team with different specializations?
If you want to play rankly atypical runners that are way, way overpowered or outclasses relative to their surroundings things things will get ugly in pretty much all systems. They sure as hell did in SR3. Few systems have as a design priority to support a battle of Marvel Heros vs. The Sims. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Jun 29 2005, 03:38 PM
Post
#40
|
|||||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 778 Joined: 6-April 05 Member No.: 7,298 |
You are entirely, completely, and totally missing the point--or entirely, completely, and totally not addressing it. A good gaming system should be able to handle characters with a wide range of skill levels, because last I checked, there are a wide range of skill levels in the world. I don't want it easy. I want it non-broken. I want it hard where is should be hard, and I want it to get harder in a sensible way as conditions get worse. If you are not going to address this point, why bother quoting what I say and typing your text after it?
Pretty much all except for SR3, perhaps. Don't forget that we are comparing SR3 to SR4. SR3 handles this pretty well.
|
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Jun 29 2005, 04:01 PM
Post
#41
|
|||||||
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,718 Joined: 14-September 02 Member No.: 3,263 |
I'm addressing it by pointing out it appears to me you are twisting in knots over some issue that doesn't seem to be there. It would seem that Low ability + Hard task/difficult environment + Little or no relavent bonus from tools/ware + Edge = Remotely Possible. So what exactly are the requirements for passing Ellery's non-broken test that i'm missing here? I don't really see a substantive issue other than the possibility that once your penalties outweigh benefits enough that you'd have less than 1 die to roll that you don't get to roll that one die, and just aren't allowed to roll (although with Defaulting....). Or that only 1 die gives you an insanely high chance of some fatal glitch. Although given that you apparently can glitch AND succeed with the same roll even the latter doesn't seem even that bad. EDIT: Hell even the former wouldn't be that bad if there was a floor on how many penalties negative you could go and still roll, like the SR3 no Default roll allowed over TN 8. EDIT: Perhaps the viability of Edge over the longterm could be questioned. *shrug*
If you consider it handled well in SR3 then then i don't see how it couldn't be handled well in SR4 given what we have seen so far. Will it be? *shrug* P.S. But then again it isn't a very high bar to pass when you have non-optimized start-up 14 Body troll soaking pretty much everthing a street ganger would be expected to fire at them (short of street gangers with TOWs or suicidal gangers with several kgs of backpack explosives), and then turning around and soaking up the damage from pistol suicide attempt. ;) EDIT: Also the high risks of using Skill(2) and the Rusian Roulette (1 in 6 rocks fall, you die) that is using a Skill(1) without some other source of dice helps keep that bar fairly low. |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Jun 29 2005, 09:49 PM
Post
#42
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 778 Joined: 6-April 05 Member No.: 7,298 |
Succeeding at a remotely possible test should not be edge-dependent unless edge refreshes really fast. Otherwise, once someone is out of edge, it's not even remotely possible. Let's consider the options for someone with a low skill, low attribute roll with penalties. Let's suppose they have 4 dice and they should be getting 4 dice of penalties. Maybe they're lightly wounded, walking, and they're trying to shoot someone who is running. Firstly, note that an expert who can normally toss 12 dice is going to be tossing 8, and thus still making the shot almost every time. Then, note that our fellow here is going to be tossing--well, how much will he be tossing? If he's tossing 1, then he has a 1/3 chance to hit (not counting possible dodge). If he's tossing 0, then he has zero chance to hit. The latter is "broken" by my criteron, since there is no chance, which means that the runner is safe from arbitrarily many such shooters (an absurd result). Okay, so he's tossing 1 die. Now, suppose the lighting is poor, and he gets 2 more dice of penalties. Um, okay, now he's still tossing 1 die. The penalties haven't made things worse--the chance of hitting is still 1/3! That's also broken. Now let's suppose that we raise the threshold number of hits needed for success instead. Being lightly wounded isn't a big enough penalty, nor is walking, nor is the opponent moving, nor is the slightly worse lighting. So now they take no penalty at all, despite having a bunch of factors hampering them. That's broken too. Or, they take 4 dice in penalties, which is okay here, but by extension, if you're badly wounded and the opponent has cover, you may as well give up and go home because the penalties will be so severe. It's a no-win situation. The least-losing situation is probably having threshold penalties and just not worrying when someone is hampered by a bunch of minor things, but you can hardly expect me to be excited about that when SR3 already does a substantially better job of it. And that's the least bad situation just taking this one issue into account. If we take the whole game design into account, maybe one will have to use another option instead, and that would make this aspect still worse.
Only with armor. And then, try a headshot.
|
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Jun 29 2005, 10:08 PM
Post
#43
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 527 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,118 |
The problem I forsee is that, if it's total darkness, you're running, etc, etc, etc... you're going to end up with a dice pool of one die. If the system is built to make this useless, then it'll be desired to set up fights in a situation where most opponents will be utterly unable to succeed in attacks against you. If the system is built with a one die limit actually being able to accomplish something, then why not stand on your head and shut your eyes, and make a called shot to a specific cranial nerve? It won't make your shot any harder than it already is, at one die available. It just seems like it'll be too easy to abuse.
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 30 2005, 03:56 AM
Post
#44
|
|||||||||
|
Grand Master of Run-Fu Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,840 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Tir Tairngire Member No.: 178 |
Actually, regular attack and full attack aren't the same thing, but I don't think I made it clear enough. My character's BAB, before attribute modifers, is 6/1. So, I'd need the modifiers for first shot, second shot, first shot with rapid shot, third shot with rapid shot, first shot with dagger, second shot with dagger, first shot with dagger and rapid shot, etc, etc. I also have the Throw Anything feat, so I'm constantly using improvised throwing weapons; I can't just use the dagger calculation for everything. And as you pointed out, I've simply got to add Point-Blank shot into those calculations, which gives me yet another modifier to figure. And then there's the GM-imposed penalties that I have to calculate, such as Target in melee and cover.
As Ellery pointed out, the difference between the proposed system and the current one is that SR3 has a working mechanic for the longshots. Someone could have a TN of 28 and still have a chance, however slim, of pulling it off. If SR4 has a threshold of 2 hits, and the character only has 1 die, there's no way he can pull off the shot. As Ellery pointed out, that's incredibly broken, and effectively kills dramatically-tense moments by replacing them with fatalism. Just tonight, I had players staring and praying that their sixes managed to reroll just high enough for them to live-- the tension was amazing, as was the intensity. I'd hate for that to be replaced with: "It takes how many successes? Never mind, I'm dead, just hand me a new character sheet." Yes, you can correct for this, like nWoD did-- if you're reduced to one die, you get to roll it. If you score a 10, you succeed; roll anything but a 1, you fail, and roll a 1 and fumble. However, the odds of fumbling aren't any greater than before; and the odds of succeeding never goes below 10%. So, you could have a blindfolded guy, hopping up and down on one leg, in high winds, singing the Ankh-Morpok national anthem while playing tiddlywinks, aiming his bow at the dragon's left eyelash-- he has a 10% chance of pulling it off, and possibly slaying the dragon. He'd have exactly the same chance as a kid trying out the bow for the first time. This, also, is incredibly broken. This, of course, assumes that you can't be dropped below 1 die. Which may not be the case; but then Scenario 1 gets invoked. If you're dropped to zero dice, then you can't pull it off, regardless. The player and character only get to sit there, which is an incredibly boring way to game. |
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
Jun 30 2005, 10:16 AM
Post
#45
|
|||||||||||
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,718 Joined: 14-September 02 Member No.: 3,263 |
Keep living on the Edge and it will catch up to you. *shrug*
How often does a longshot test, say TN9+ in a weak skill, like that come up where it is remotely important muchless critical? [edit]And there is no other alternative action possible.[/edit] If it is coming up more than twice/session, maybe three/session, your character is likely screwed anyway because he isn't going to keep making them. How about in SR3 where you don't have any skill, Defaulting? Newer characters this can easily happen with. Older characters not so much. No long shots allowed there at all, either, ever. With the TN modifier just for Defaulting it takes very few penalties to hit TN9. *shrug* EDIT:
EDIT: Ya, that is why i specifically mentioned that possibility would kinda suck. But there is nothing suggesting they will do that, nor anything inherent in fixing the TN at 5 that forces you to remove all the dice.
Making it much more Dodgable (cybered Trolls sure can move quick for big fellas). Top it off with dermal sheathing/plating. :( I was talking about a pistol to a non-helmeted forehead for suicide. |
||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
Jun 30 2005, 04:54 PM
Post
#46
|
|||
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,718 Joined: 14-September 02 Member No.: 3,263 |
This is more than a bit of a tangent to the thread, but i'll give this last post, assuming you have Quickdraw, for unlimited thrown daggers, and Weapon Focus(Thrown Dagger): Basic Melee +8/+3 Longsword: +8/+3, 1d8+2, crit: 19-20 Dagger(Finessed): +10/+5, 1d4+2 crit: 19-20 Basic Ranged: +10/+5 Dagger(thrown): +11/+6, 1d4+2 crit: 19-20 Dagger(Rapid Shot): +9/+9/+4, 1d4+2, crit: 19-20, range increment 10' Longbow: +10/+5, 1d6, crit: x3 Longbow(Rapid Shot): +8/+8/+3, 1d6, crit: x3, range increment 100' Longbow, MW Composite Mighty +2 : +11/+6, 1d6+2, crit: x3 Longbow, (Rapid Shot) MW Composite Mighty +2 : +9/+9/+4, 1d6+2, crit: x3, range increment 110' Notice that you only need to list the Full Attack because a standard action Attack uses the first number of the Full Attack (barring some strange oddity). Now put that all in appropriate text/spacial formating and it is a quick reference. Not only that, but i find it is easier to memorize. YMMV of course. P.S. Yes D&D weapons can become a large field of weapon stats for fighter types. Like i said earlier think of it as the fighter's equivalent to a spell list. Also the game and it's historic roots are in many ways light table-top tactical battle rules. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jun 30 2005, 05:32 PM
Post
#47
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 778 Joined: 6-April 05 Member No.: 7,298 |
And as I've explained, that's broken. It means that, for example, if a skilled sam shoots out the lights of the four Lone Star squad cars, or throws a few smoke grenades, he'll have Immunity To Normal Cops once they run out of edge, at which point he can just walk around, shooting them accurately even though he can't see them and getting, oh, two successes on average while they can't get any, ever. They could fire ten thousand rounds at him and never hit. And that's with a starting street sam.
Trolls run out of combat pool for dodging if they're facing too many people. The suicide thing is broken. But fixing that doesn't have anything to do with fixed vs. variable TNs.
|
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Jun 30 2005, 05:41 PM
Post
#48
|
|||
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,013 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
By canon, a character may inflict any desired damage level on themselves with any weapon at hand. It's unrealistically easy for an übertroll to commit suicide, not unreasonably difficult. ~J |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jun 30 2005, 05:43 PM
Post
#49
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 778 Joined: 6-April 05 Member No.: 7,298 |
Where's that rule printed?
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 30 2005, 05:57 PM
Post
#50
|
|
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,013 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
Page 134, Magic in the Shadows.
~J |
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 14th August 2025 - 06:20 PM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.